I saw similar copy pop up in the marketing for the new film The Raven, based on the works of Edgar Allen Poe. It's as though marketing execs feel an untapped power in the notion that books in their original state are just dead weight. That only the magic of the cinema can actually unlock them from their dormant state. Movies aren't just an alternate method of storytelling; they're the only method that brings life to stories, that translates them from the dormant DNA of their source texts into an actual experience.
I know reading a whole book might take a smidge more effort than sitting in an air-conditioned theater for two hours, but since when were books just dead stories? How is watching someone famous recite awkward dialogue on a 20-foot screen a more "lifelike" storytelling experience than actually animating a Grimm fairy tale or a Poe novella with your own mind? Watching a movie is still a canned, repeatable experience--you're not seeing the actors on a stage, you're consuming a product. The idea of filmmakers as the Frankensteins of stories, animating old, dead, cast-off parts, disempowers the reader--and creates industry consumers as a result. Which is great for Hollywood, I guess, but philosophically bad for those of us who love stories in their pure, uncut form. Personally, I'd take a still, "dead" book over a trendy Julia Roberts vehicle any day. I don't need to see and hear my stories to believe in them. The words themselves are plenty alive for me--no blockbuster necessary.